On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 1:44 PM, Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Jun 01, 2012 at 11:31:20AM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 6:02 AM, Andrew Pinski
andrew.pin...@caviumnetworks.com wrote:
Hi,
When I modified GCC to change the majority of bitfield
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 4:44 AM, Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Jun 01, 2012 at 11:31:20AM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 6:02 AM, Andrew Pinski
andrew.pin...@caviumnetworks.com wrote:
Hi,
When I modified GCC to change the majority of bitfield
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 6:02 AM, Andrew Pinski
andrew.pin...@caviumnetworks.com wrote:
Hi,
When I modified GCC to change the majority of bitfield accesses
which were done via component ref to BIT_FIELD_REF, SRA messes up
because when it does the replacement it still tries to use the
Hi,
On Fri, Jun 01, 2012 at 11:31:20AM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 6:02 AM, Andrew Pinski
andrew.pin...@caviumnetworks.com wrote:
Hi,
When I modified GCC to change the majority of bitfield accesses
which were done via component ref to BIT_FIELD_REF, SRA messes
Hi,
When I modified GCC to change the majority of bitfield accesses
which were done via component ref to BIT_FIELD_REF, SRA messes up
because when it does the replacement it still tries to use the
BIT_FIELD_REF except it never places the old value in the struct for
the BIT_FIELD_REF to work